Dispatches- Britain’s Benefit scandal

[Sunnywalker]

Anybody watched this? It’s made me so angry. Some highlights include a company that can’t recruit an apprentice on 26k because sickness benefits would amount to 24k so it wouldn’t be worth it. 500,000, 25-34 years old on long term sick, a woman who has never had a FT job and claims 35k in benefits, this lady would like to work but says will never achieve the same income if she worked.

This country is bankrupt, public services crumbling! What is going on? Why isn’t there an overhaul!

How is that a 'choice'? You would die.

It's pretty rare though. A single parent who is disabled or has disabled children maybe. For most people benefits are not that high.
Then of course it can feel quite unfair for people who are working on the lowest wages having to also pay things like commuting costs and not getting a discount of anything.

Who “immediately receives benefits” on arriving in “England”. Do you mean those seeking asylum who are not allowed to work?

Incidentally you are not fully accurate on living overseas and receiving benefits. When we were still in the EU I studied in French and received support from the French government for housings costs the same as any other French student would.

Which is the same choice working people face everyday.

They still live at home, with their gfs too. Another friend has a four bed house, her three kids have left home are all married with their own kids and she rents the rooms out to foreign students. She has a mercedes and goes to Australia every year to visit one if her kids who lives their. I thought you had to move somewhere smaller to make room for families but apparently not.

@dingledangledoos

Sorry, I wasn't thinking of asylum seekers - no they should not starve.

I meant generally people moving to the uk with a view of claiming benefits and not working.

Someone on here was posting recently asking if they would be better off moving to the uk than where they currently live because they could claim more benefits. That seems wrong.

No, because they would not be left to starve - they would receive the benefits they were entitled to. It's false equivalence.

Or do you seriously believe we should get rid of all benefits and make anyone out of work litter pick for £70pw?

20% of people in this country are in relative poverty, about 17% in absolute poverty.

They rises to 49% of people on income related benefits.

56% of people in households where nobody is working are living in poverty.

The issue isn’t that benefits are too low. It’s that wages are too low and we’ve spent 14 years increasing the gap between the richest in society and the poorest.

‘Sickness benefit’? ESA is just over £90 a week - same as JSA - £4,706 a year - not £36k

rent and housing benefit is the big one!

but I think what you mean are disability related benefits- which are a totally different thing.

I did. I worked PT PAYE for £600pm and PT self employed for a variable amount but under £10k pa. Wasn't entitled to a penny in benefits. Kids were at uni. I lived with no heating or hot water for YEARS because almost all my earnings went in rent.

Who hasxssid bring back work houses? As said, lots if jobs out there so of course they should be made to work. Whatscl the alternative? You think people should be able to choose not to work as a lifestyle choice, and get well paid for it?

On what basis would they be able to move here and claim benefits?

Point taken, but I have run out of empathy, sorry. Not for everyone, I assure you, but for some people, yes.

They are on benefits though, free nhs , free accommodation, dental care, assistance with travel expenses,interpreters, to name but a few. The weekly allowance is for clothes toiletries etc. Unfortunately they are not allowed to work until their asylum claims have been approved.

Absolutely, I have a relative who has full PIP etc as she has anxiety and can't go to work.
She manages to go out every day and buys "stuff" her house is full of things she will never use.
She has new clothes all the time as do her kids, she smokes and buys 20 cigarettes a day.
She admits she'll never work and enjoys her life.
I see people working so hard on minimum wages who have nowhere near the lifestyle she has, and she's not alone.

Just going to point out that the only way an unemployed person is getting £35k in benefits is if they, or someone on their household, is disabled, either claiming PIP or LCWRA.
Everyone else is subject to the benefit cap, roughly £25k in London. Less in other areas.

I would look at tapering off benefits from NEETs (not in education, employment or training). We can't have 870K young people not in work. After 6 months I would taper off any benefits for fit young people as that figure is dreadful.

Successive governmentd seem to have done everything they can to drive private landlords out of the market causing rents to rise whilst making no alternative provision.

I would prefer to see less money handed out in benefits and more social housing provided at reasonable rates.

I would like to see subsidised high quality childcare (like in Scandinavia) but only for those who work.

I would like to see absent parents forced to pay up for their children and benefits reduced accordingly.

I would like a crack down on illegal work and cash in hand work.

Sickness benefits being paid to one in ten of the working age population is also totally unsustainable.

Honestly we do really need to sort ourselves out or we will go further and further into decline and debt.

@JHound

Who “immediately receives benefits” on arriving in “England”. Do you mean those seeking asylum who are not allowed to work?*

No I didn't mean asylum seekers. I just clarified that in my other post.*

Incidentally you are not fully accurate on living overseas and receiving benefits. When we were still in the EU I studied in French and received support from the French government for housings costs the same as any other French student would.
*
I have lived in two countries (not in Europe) and there is no support for non nationals. I was just talking about my experience. England is far too soft.*

Also, and I say this with genuine curiosity... why are some family's able to claim money for child that have SEN but they attend mainstream school and hang out with friends etc after school? What is the need for families to have this money? I get it if they require extra electricity as they are hooked up to a respirator 24/7 but genuinely I don't understand the need for mothers to receive this money when their child is able bodied and doesn't attend any specific appointments? I mean I don't begrudge it if it's needed but I don't understand it? I see this quite a lot at my DS school and I am baffled.

That poster iirc was someone living in Ireland who was curious about her position should she move to England.
People who move here do not get benefits straight away. Why do you think they do?

www.turn2us.org.uk/get-support/information-for-your-situation/immigration-status-and-benefits/check-if-you-are-defined-as-a-person-subject-to-immigration-control

I don't think I'd use the word comfortable for any of it, and this is part of the problem.

Minimum wage is often laughed at or compared to something only low skilled/students might earn. However, it should be possible for someone who does any of the 100s of different, important, jobs it covers to have a nice life without even thinking of having to claim a top up. The government is subsiding companies - often companies based overseas! - by continuing to allow minimum wage to stay so low and topping up people working full time.

Benefits cliche bingo.

"Those on child related benefits would refuse to do overtime as they didn't need to work any more. "

Why should anyone do overtime if they don't want to? Are you arguing that everyone should be willing to do overtime? And if so, why?
Sounds like your jobs are shit to be honest.

you also know that thousands of us ‘on benefits’ are also in work, including full time work, and including people in professional positions?

38% of people on UC work. That includes full & part time workers.

62%, that's almost two thirds of claimants, do not work.